/m/bosox

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

If the Red Sox hadn't managed to become another self-entitled franchise of jackasses before, the entire "our 2004 and 2007 World Series titles don't count because we clinched on the road" meme should settle the matter once and for all.

And precisely how is it that Brady doesn't break into that big 4??? Because the NFL is at the bottom of the New England sports food chain. I get it but I would argue that Brady accomplished more than Orr and Bird.

In the 2000s, Tom Brady made his run … and if the 2007 Pats had finished 19-0, he would have joined them. Right now, he’s still standing outside the front door waiting for the bouncer to let him in.

Don't want to hijack to a football discussion but really? Brady has a legit claim for GOAT. He has more championships than Orr and Williams combined. He has the records, the great seasons, the team success, and all that other stuff. Why isn't he in there? He certainly deserves to be.

Don't want to hijack to a football discussion but really? Brady has a legit claim for GOAT. He has more championships than Orr and Williams combined. He has the records, the great seasons, the team success, and all that other stuff. Why isn't he in there? He certainly deserves to be.

Yeah, Brady's definitely in the inner circle. I'd say Bourque is on the lower level of the monument face. Yaz too. Papi would join them, along with Pedro, the defaced sculpture of Clemens, Paul Pierce, and maybe Cam Neely.

Boston has a lot of sports history. I don't think they can cut it down to just four icons unless you keep it to one per sport. Just take Russell, Brady, Orr, and Williams and be happy with it. If you want to swap in Bird or Ortiz, it comes with a cost.

If the Red Sox hadn't managed to become another self-entitled franchise of jackasses before, the entire "our 2004 and 2007 World Series titles don't count because we clinched on the road" meme should settle the matter once and for all.

Was any Red Sox member or fan even bringing that up? It was just Fox and the rest of the media trying to invent some faux gravitas. Nobody even noticed until like after game 4.

If the Red Sox hadn't managed to become another self-entitled franchise of jackasses before, the entire "our 2004 and 2007 World Series titles don't count because we clinched on the road" meme should settle the matter once and for all.

Was any Red Sox member or fan even bringing that up? It was just Fox and the rest of the media trying to invent some faux gravitas. Nobody even noticed until like after game 4.

This. I don't know a single Red Sox fan this past week who didn't want wrap up the Series as fast as possible. All things being equal, of course you'd rather have your team win it at home...but Fox was looking for a way to wring out a little more nostalgia out of "1918".

Milwaukee is hurt by the best Bucks (as well as Hank Aaron) having spent much of their careers in other cities. Kareem, Oscar, Hank, Yount is pretty good but 3 of those guys are very associated with other cities as well.

Simmons is not suggesting that these are the best Boston athletes, but that they have reached iconic stature with the fan base. Orr won two titles, but he is the easiest call on the list. He is basically a God in the city. Bird is right there as well. Honestly, if you wanted to remove someone from Simmons' list, I would remove Williams and add Brady. There was never a time during Williams' career that he was as popular as Ortiz, mainly because the team wasn't as popular. By the time Williams quit, people hardly cared about him and he didn't much care for them either.

If you did New York and limited it to 4, would there be any non-Yankees on the list?

Probably not. I don't think anyone else tops any of Ruth-Gehrig-DiMaggio-Mantle in cultural cachet. No non-Yankee in any sport got any more than two titles for NY, except the Islanders but NYCers don't even think of them.

New York is too big and diversified, no sporting figure since Ruth can become a singular icon of the city's cultural identity the way Ortiz and Jordan and Montana are. Seaver, Simms, Eli, LT, Namath, Messier, Frazier, Ewing are all respected but it's not like you couldn't write the history of the city without them. Jeter and Rivera remain to be seen for historical perspective but probably will come in ahead of that group long term. You could probably even add Berra and Rizzuto to reach 8 Yankees atop the list of beloved NYC athletes before going to any other teams.

They will burn that city to the ground before putting Lebron on their Mt. Rushmore. There is little that is more embarassing to be a Cleveland fan than just how butthurt everyone still is three years later. And theres a lot to be embarassed about as a Cleveland fan.

Not an NFL fan at all. But isn't Manning's case kind of Marinoesque? Heaps of records, yardage, etc, but as an NFL QB aren't titles all that matter? I'm thinking Brady, Montana as 1,2....

That kind of thinking is how you end up with Troy Aikman: Hall of Famer.

Manning is the best QB who's ever played, and the most valuable player who's ever played. Sean's weaker sister, Football Reference, ranks him first in Weighted Approximate Value (Brady's 14th BTW).

By Simple Rating System, his last year in Indy, the Colts were the 10th best team in the NFL. Without him, they were the worst (by a lot). The Broncos were the 24th best team in the league before he got there. After his arrival, they were the fourth best.

That kind of thinking is how you end up with Troy Aikman: Hall of Famer.

Yeah, I can see the apprehension concerning that. However QB is far and away the most influential position on offense and there have been very few teams that have had a successful run without a good QB; one season I'll concede, multiple seasons...no.

By Simple Rating System, his last year in Indy, the Colts were the 10th best team in the NFL. Without him, they were the worst (by a lot). The Broncos were the 24th best team in the league before he got there. After his arrival, they were the fourth best.

Fair enough. However, it is difficult to measure how those teams would have fared with Brady stepping into the fold or a prime Montana. We've seen many cases over the years where a lousy to mediocre team has become quite successful largely through the addition of a quality QB. I'm not saying Manning isn't the best statistically, I'm just saying there is some room for discussion as to who may have the most valuable career.

I'm no longer an NFL fan (it is unwatchable!) but I have seen a little of Peyton this year and he is incredible. However, I think Brady has done significantly better in cold weather than Peyton so he may be cooling off a little soon.

And since they are relatively close, how can you not take into account their playoff records? (Cold weather ability when football is a totally different, much more difficult game comes into account here.)

Peyton is probably the best regular season QB (though debatable given the absurd rules the last 10 years) - overall, no. I'll take Brady & Montana (and Bradshaw for playoff games).

Happy to see that no one made a case for the most over-hyped, over-rated QB of all-time - Farve.

Philadelphia's is Wilt Chamberlain, Julius Erving, Mike Schmidt, and Joe Frazier. I cannot justify leaving Frazier off the list, except maybe for Bednarik, and that no one listed Philly native Chamberlain before is criminal. (Bednarik/Erving is a close call.)

Probably not. I don't think anyone else tops any of Ruth-Gehrig-DiMaggio-Mantle in cultural cachet. No non-Yankee in any sport got any more than two titles for NY, except the Islanders but NYCers don't even think of them.

I think Christy Mathewson or John McGraw deserves as a place on that Mt. Rushmore. Mathewson was probably a bigger star than anybody besides Ruth, and McGraw has the multiple titles, bags of pennants and franchise building mystique behind him.

I also think Jackie Robinson has a place as well, his cultural importance is legions ahead of everybody else.

It's funny how many baseball players you could argue over - non-Yankees we haven't discussed include Willie Mays, Mel Ott and Gil Hodges - before you get to anybody else. Will any non-ball player from NY get this when they pass away? Maybe Namath.

If the Red Sox hadn't managed to become another self-entitled franchise of jackasses before, the entire "our 2004 and 2007 World Series titles don't count because we clinched on the road" meme should settle the matter once and for all.

No one in Boston thinks anything near that. It was entirely a media construction designed to try to make this World Series more exciting.

Orr won two titles, but he is the easiest call on the list. He is basically a God in the city.

I just want to second this. Orr is unquestionably "the man" in Boston. Put all the above mentioned Boston athletes in a room to be introduced to the fans and the last player introduced is going to be Orr and none of the other guys are going to complain.

There have been better players for the Toronto Maple Leafs (Sundin, Sittler, Salming), but not a single player in the past 40 years has be so beloved by the fans in Toronto like Wendel Clark.

Stieb is probably the best combination of skill and popularity, but in a few years I can see Robbie Alomar moving into this spot.

Pinball Clemens is easily the best and most loved football player in Argos history. Throw in the countless hours of charity work he's done, plus coaching/GM/president of the team during their latest revival as winners, and no one comes close. I'd say that his popularity absolutely outstrips the history of the team itself. If he wanted to, he could run for mayor and win in a landslide.

Carter is actually reviled by a large percentage of the fans (for quitting and leaving) but he represents the high water mark for the franchise (one basket away from making the Eastern finals) and is easily the most famous player during his time with the franchise (the dunk contest).

Minnesota is hard. Some greatness, but not so much that totally stands out.

Hmmm.

Baseball: Killer or Kirby (Pre-character revelations it was Kirby in a walk)
Football: Alan Page? Fran Tarkington? Bud Grant probably.
Basketball: KG (The easiest choice by far)
Hockey: I have no idea. Not a hockey guy. I am sure there is someone though.

Obviously Wagner would be an appropriate replacement for Clemente, but that's not how it would go down. Bradshaw and Billy Knight get honorable mentions and one could argue that Tony Dorsett should replace Marino if we're evaluating on the basis of college performance only.

Don't want to hijack to a football discussion but really? Brady has a legit claim for GOAT. He has more championships than Orr and Williams combined. He has the records, the great seasons, the team success, and all that other stuff. Why isn't he in there? He certainly deserves to be.

Of course he does. Simmons, jackass that he is, is arguing that Brady's not the GOAT because he didn't deliver a perfect season and we're owed one. It's facile and moronic to argue such a thing, but naturally Simmons is up to the task.

#71. I was going to argue with your pick of Modano for Minnesota because the team moved to Dallas fairly early in his career but then I thought about it and, yeah even with the move Modano is likely more beloved than Brian Bellows, Dino Ciccarelli, Marian Gaborik or any other skater to play there.

Splitting hairs, but I think Ewing Kauffman is more beloved than Lamar Hunt. They named a stadium after him, he has a staute at the TSC, the team was good during his entire life, while Lamar let blind loyalism to his GM allow the team to wallow in crap for over a decade.

If you allow for college sports, you could make a case for Bill Snyder. He's beloved by K-State fans, and admired and respected by other fans.

Orr could dominate a game like no one else I've seen in NHL,NBA,NFL. His ability to play keep-away during penalty killing was even more incredible (if less exciting) than his end-to-end rushes.

Evaluating QBs (and WRs) over the life of the NFL may be even more problematic than doing it for MLB players, IMO. The passing game since the mid-80s is a different sport than before that. The only bigger change in offenses might be when Sammy Baugh brought passing out of its "dead ball era", and any discussion of GOAT ought to include him, along with Graham and Unitas. I just have no idea how to compare them with QBs from the Marino/Montana days and following.

I'd also nominate Musial as being the most distant (in St.Louis esteem) from fellow city monumentees.

I don't follow football closely but why has Peyton's teams done so poorly in the postseason? Is it weather-related? Do turf-teams generally do worse in the playoffs?

Mostly bad luck. 7 of the 11 losses were by less than one td. 3 in overtime, lost by his defense. Compare to Brady, who had the luck of his team happening to hold the ball last in two Super Bowls. Flip a few of those coins and Brady would be 1-4 in SBs and every bit the postseason failure Manning is perceived to be.

Actually, there isn't a whole lot on the NHL side. The North Stars only had 1 Hall of Famer (well, other than the one who was inducted after dying on the ice but only played 1 season). College hockey is where you'd have to look, Herb Brooks coached the Gophers for most of the 70s and then lead the USA to victory over the USSR in 1980.

What about Hrbek? My outsider's sense is that he was and is incredibly popular. Local boy makes good etc...

Herbie is very popular, but he's not on the level of a Puckett or a Killebrew. I'd go with Killebrew based on my time in the Twin Cities.

Mostly bad luck. 7 of the 11 losses were by less than one td. 3 in overtime, lost by his defense. Compare to Brady, who had the luck of his team happening to hold the ball last in two Super Bowls. Flip a few of those coins and Brady would be 1-4 in SBs and every bit the postseason failure Manning is perceived to be.

Peyton bore plenty of responsibility for his playoff losses. He threw tons of interceptions, particularly early in his career, in his playoff losses. He notably threw 4 picks in the AFCCG against New England in 2003 (after having thrown 8 TDs in the two games leading up to that one), then led his team to all of 3 points in New England the following year.

Hell, even the year they won the SB he didn't play very well in the playoffs, throwing 3 TDs vs. 7 INTs in the 4 games.

In his later years he's played better in the postseason, but not great, and he threw that killer INT against the Saints to essentially sealed the Colts' SB loss that seasons. And last season he essentially handed the game over to the Ravens in OT with another awful pick.

Peyton's teams have generally done poorly in the postseason because he hasn't played well in many of the playoff games. Yes, he had help in losing some of the games, but to paint this as "his defense let him down" isn't accurate at all IMO.

That's ridiculous, Andy. Two Cubs, two Bears, and no Michael Jordan!? No one in Chicago cares that he played for the Wizards later on.

I do like the Santo choice, though. I'd probably have him as the Cub over Banks. Personally, I'd replace Ditka with Hull, but Ditka is (wrongly) immensely popular in this city.

Going left to right, I'd go: Jordan, Payton, Santo, Ditka. I'd actually think hard about Pippen, as well. And if Derrick Rose can win two championships or more, he'd make it (the hometown factor is huge for him).

It's unfortunate that the Sox have no one worthy, though. Oh well.

------

Favre is hurt not because he bounced around, but because he played for that city's rival. It would be as if David Ortiz signed with the Yankees next year.

That, and because (a) he was such a primadonna with the whole retirement/unretirement stuff that it turned off a lot of people and (b) he was replaced by a QB who arguably (ARGUABLY) has been even better, and won a Super Bowl just a few years after becoming the starter.

Peyton's teams have generally done poorly in the postseason because he hasn't played well in many of the playoff games. Yes, he had help in losing some of the games, but to paint this as "his defense let him down" isn't accurate at all IMO.

I don't think it's accurate either, but Peyton and Brady have very similar postseason numbers, which leads me to believe that overall Brady got more help.

Taking the 20-3 game as one example, Brady threw 27 times for 144 yards against a below average defense. New England rushed for 200 yards, the Colts for about 40. Peyton's lone turnover came with 12 seconds left in the game. His teammates lost two fumbles and turned a bad punt snap into a safety. I have a hard time believing that the Pats won that game because Brady outplayed Peyton.

(I can see Walter for Butkus; Hull if you want all four sports represented)

Insulting. Ditka and Butkus? Ugh. Sure, both are popular. But come on. Yes, put Hull on for covering all 4 sports, but don't carve it in stone because Toews is going to pass him before it's all said and done.

See Michael Jordan who didn't make the list for Chicago in #85.

Which was just dumb.

I do like the Santo choice, though. I'd probably have him as the Cub over Banks. Personally, I'd replace Ditka with Hull, but Ditka is (wrongly) immensely popular in this city.

Yeah, Santo over Banks is an interesting, but possibly correct, call. Of course, most non-Cubs actually hate Santo so that might keep Banks ahead of him.

Going left to right, I'd go: Jordan, Payton, Santo, Ditka. I'd actually think hard about Pippen, as well. And if Derrick Rose can win two championships or more, he'd make it (the hometown factor is huge for him).

Agreed on Rose. Don't think so about Pip, though he's trying hard. He just wasn't that beloved here the first time (1.7 seconds and all), though I'd say he was underappreciated.

I say the Ditka stuff is overblown. He might be 4th right now, but it's not a strong 4th, IMO.